Not Seen on TV: Hefty Handling Charges

The Haggler tries to stay away from his phone while watching late-night television or low-rated cable shows. Both are filled with those “as seen on TV” product pitches that sorely test the Haggler’s impulse control. If a phone were nearby, the Haggler would now own a Hurricane Spin Mop (it “cleans, dries and polishes in one easy step!”), a Miracle Bamboo Pillow (“the only pillow that hugs you back!”) and at least a couple of pairs of Big Vision glasses (because everyone wants to “see things big and clear!”)

Resisting these life enhancers takes steely resolve, which not everybody possesses.

Q. In November, I purchased one bottle of Scratch Aide, expecting to pay $10 for it, along with a modest shipping and handling fee. I ended up being charged more than $80. I got three bottles of Scratch Aide, and three bottles of wood butter, along with a large bottle of furniture polish. I had explicitly said that I wanted one bottle of Scratch Aide for $10 and nothing more.

I was charged nearly $50 for shipping and handling — for a box that could not have cost more than $12 to send.

SAS Group of Tarrytown, N.Y., which markets the product on TV, states on its invoice that I can return all of the products free of charge. But I will not get a refund for shipping and handling, which is much of what I spent.

This seems pretty outrageous to me. Can you help?

Lola Backlund Lakewood, Ohio

A. The Haggler did a little research on SAS Group. It is owned by Scott Sobo, according to his LinkedIn page and other online sources. It currently has an F rating from the Better Business Bureau, along with 169 complaints that sound remarkably similar to Ms. Backlund’s. “I ordered $20 worth of products and was charged a total of $53.88,” one typical entry reads. “Shipping and handling were outrageously high and included items I did not order.”

If so many people have complained about the same problem with the same company, you may wonder why no one in a position of authority — the government, for instance — has tried to stop it.

Wonder no more. In 2011, SAS settled an investigation by the Pennsylvania attorney general’s office by agreeing to pay restitution to consumers who said they were overcharged for shipping and handling fees after buying as-seen-on-TV products.

“SAS charged shipping and handling for those free products that far exceeded the actual cost for shipping and handling,” said Linda Kelly, then the attorney general. As part of the deal, the company was prohibited from making false and misleading statements in the future. That included telling customers that a product was free when, in fact, shipping and handling fees were tacked on.

After reading this back story, the Haggler contacted SAS. An email was returned the same day by Monica Bryant, who identified herself as the company’s bookkeeper. Typically, the Haggler deals with media relations types, but Ms. Bryant was more than equal to the task of speaking for the company.

“Experience has led me to notice that many consumers increase their order quantities,” she wrote. “While a second product may be free, there is usually a shipping and handling charge. It takes time and effort to record an order and have it shipped.”

In a subsequent email, Ms. Bryant said that she had confirmed her own hunch. She said that she had listened to a recording of Ms. Backlund’s call, ordering the Scratch Aide, and that Ms. Backlund had ordered three bottles, not one.

Aha!

The Haggler asked Ms. Bryant to email an audio file of that call, which many companies have done. Not so fast, Ms. Bryant replied. There is personal information on the call and thus, she said, she can’t share it.

Hmm. What if Ms. Backlund begged you to share the call? Would that assuage your fears over her privacy?

Apparently not.

“If I decline, your automatic assumption is that I don’t want you to hear it?” Ms. Bryant asked.

That’s right, quoth the Haggler, who never heard the recording.

During this exchange, which unfolded over a few days, Ms. Bryant twice mentioned that she was raised to believe that honesty is the best policy, adding, “I only wish others did as well.”

The Haggler felt sort of bad for taking time from Ms. Bryant’s actual job, something she bemoaned a few times during our emails. But she volunteered, and no matter how many times the Haggler asked to connect to Mr. Sobo, he never got in touch.

Instead, someone named Ed Kurzawa responded, though only to reiterate everything that Ms. Bryant had already said. When the Haggler asked for Mr. Kurzawa’s title, and posed a few basic questions — like, how long SAS has been around? — he did not reply.

It should be noted that the company immediately refunded Ms. Backlund’s order, in full, after the Haggler’s first email. Nonetheless, Ms. Backlund sounds chastened. She has now adopted the Haggler’s approach to mixing television and commerce.

“I am never going to order anything on TV again,” she said last week.

EMAIL: haggler@nytimes.comor tweet to @TheHagglerNYT. Keep it family-friendly and under 250 words, include your hometown and go easy on the caps-lock key. Letters may be edited for clarity and length.

A version of this article appears in print on , on Page BU3 of the New York edition with the headline: Not Seen on TV: Hefty Handling Charges. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe